Collective Impact

Headlines during the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the vulnerability of our food system—far too many people continue to face food shortages or have not had the means to acquire healthy…

An excerpt from Don’t Lead Alone on acting like a network…

Fariha Raisa, Feedback Labs | April 14, 2023 A federally designated pass-through entity for refugee resettlement funding, Kentucky Office for Refugees – Catholic Charities of Louisville, recently started the Kentucky Refugee Voice Project. The project is a statewide survey of refugees, orchestrated to understand their level of satisfaction across various domains. The Catholic Charities of Louisville (CCOL) recruits bilingual enumerators to assist in building the survey tool, administering it, and providing feedback. Enumerators also work to design and facilitate focus groups in their first language. The CCOL then uses the results of the surveys and the focus groups to guide their funding decisions and program priorities in the future. The Kentucky Refugee Voice Project was initially supposed to last a few months, but it is now in its second year. Due to the unexpected longevity of the Refugee Voice Project, it has been difficult to recruit and retain enumerators for different language groups and make meaningful data out of the representative sample size. This has caused a halt in future actions and a delay in closing the feedback loop. The LabStorm, consequently, focused on best practices for feedback success with special emphasis on retainment of enumerators through successful relationship building. Closing the feedback loop. Attendees turned their focus on communication design and suggested communicating upfront as much as possible for setting expectations. They recommended setting a timeline for when the information will be shared and to follow through even if the update is just sharing that plans have changed. Communicating back to people would demonstrate that their feedback is relevant and prioritized. If any action steps were taken based on the feedback received, those changes would help signify that voices are heard and valued. It reflects the commitment of The Kentucky Refugee Voice Project and helps build credibility by being transparent. Being communicative and transparent with all the project stakeholders about the state of the project would be a major step towards a closed feedback loop. Mechanisms for feedback success. Setting boundaries was deemed imperative for ensuring a sustainable feedback practice. Being clear about what areas can and cannot be influenced by the feedback helps give a transparent perspective. The framework could include who is involved, what could be controlled, the partners engaged in the work and the sphere of specialty. An important distinction was made between Individual feedback and institutional feedback where The Kentucky Refugee Voice Project could address the interviewer impact as individual feedback even if the institutional feedback requires time to implement changes. Building meaningful relationships. To encourage retention of enumerators, they could be given the option to take a break or a pause instead of leaving. Another option could be offering a rotation for several months instead of leaving the project altogether. Moreover, their knowledge could be leveraged to train and integrate the new staff. Exit interviews were suggested to be used as a space for learning and collecting feedback from the enumerators. The discussion ended with the advice of learning from resettlement projects in other states. There was emphasis to take the step is to get more meaningful feedback on the project and the opportunity to build on it. Ensuring that people feel a part of the community and reminding the interviewers who have left that the space still remains safe for feedback can help sustain the project. Learn More About LabStorms LabStorms are collaborative problem-solving sessions designed to help organizations tackle feedback-related challenges or share what’s working well in their practice. Presenters leave the experience with honest, actionable feedback and suggestions to improve their feedback processes and tools. To learn more about participating in a virtual LabStorm, please visit feedbacklabs.org/labstorms.

Collaboration is essential if we are to have any hope of tackling the complex issues confronting us.

Lily Kirschner, Feedback Labs | March 15, 2023 The MIT Museum’s Experimental Practice Group strives to advance new ways of engaging the public with science. The Group has multiple projects in its portfolio, one of which is the Science in Vivo Project. This project aims to integrate science experiences into existing cultural contexts, settings, and events. Their goal is to foster “situated engagement,” which is moving beyond the hands-on activities typically associated with science outreach and finding ways to bring science into communities in culturally meaningful ways. For example, the Atlanta Science Festival has hosted a hands-on science zone at DragonCon for years, but in 2019 they found a way to become a part of DragonCon tradition by joining DragonCon’s public parade. Situated engagement is a new practice for most science outreach teams, so in order to help them improve their practice Science in Vivo recruited pairs of observers to visit eight situated engagement sites, observe interactions with and reactions from community members, and then share their observations with the science outreach teams. These critiques were extremely helpful in helping the science outreach teams debrief the live events they were part of. Observer pairs usually included one person with expertise in science engagement and one with professional expertise in a different domain. Observers often traveled long distances to observe the event. Now, Science in Vivo would like to include a third observer with deep ties to the community the event is situated in, in order to add a community member’s perspective to the observation team. Ben Wiehe and Amanda Figueroa presented this challenge at a LabStorm at Feedback+Atlanta. The conversation was wide-ranging and covered multiple suggestions from attendees, including: Be explicit about the expertise local observers contribute Bringing in a local observer to the event who is a member of the community will offer greater insight into the context and event experience. It is important that there is intention behind adding a local observer to the team and that their contribution is valued equally. This will also assist in establishing trust with the community by including someone who is likely to share their perspective. Consider a variety of methods to collect representative feedback LabStorm participants appreciated that adding a third observer with deep ties to the community is an important step to integrating a community voice into the observation and critique protocol. And, they cautioned that one person from a community can’t represent their community as a whole. To address MIT Museum’s second question of what strategies they can use to get representative feedback from the community, participants suggested adding multiple avenues for hearing from community members, in addition to the observer teams. At cultural events like ComicCon or LGBTQ+ pride events where there is so much going on all the time, it is beneficial to have multiple forms of feedback collection readily available to capture many different community voices. Attendees suggested having open feedback forms that anyone at an event can use to provide feedback or working with a group like Memria to set up an audio booth in which any event attendee can share their reactions and feedback.. Involve community observers in shaping observation questions Several attendees noted that to reach the goal of transforming transactions to relationships with the community, it could be helpful to involve community members in shaping the questions that event observers are asking. Asking community members what successful situated engagement looks like for them, and closing the loop on observations at the event, could be an important way to build trust between science teams and the communities they’re engaging with. The extent to which the community wants to continue engaging with the science teams to define success could be a great indicator of whether the teams are building trust with and integrating more deeply into the community over time. At the conclusion of the LabStorm, attendees left with an understanding of new ways to integrate science into local community events, and see the value that MIT Museum is putting on local voices as part of the observer team. Learn More About LabStorms LabStorms are collaborative problem-solving sessions designed to help organizations tackle feedback-related challenges or share what’s working well in their practice. Presenters leave the experience with honest, actionable feedback and suggestions to improve their feedback processes and tools. To learn more about participating in a virtual LabStorm, please visit feedbacklabs.org/labstorms.

A culture of collaboration is the only viable model to strengthen prospects for long-term success and sustainability.

To advance equity, leadership programs must affirm, center, and strengthen the collective skills, knowledge, and aspirations of communities.

With current momentum around afterschool and summer learning programs, we are at a unique time for education investors to maximize their reach in a sustainable way. I believe leaders can best leverage…